PixArk was also derived from Ark, which had a fairly substantial player base already, which would probably go some way towards explaining the numbers difference… that and dinosaurs!
Crete
October 24, 2018, 9:42pm
42
Every now and then someone will bring up steam numbers, and start getting nervous. I did at one time, as I love this game and don’t want it to die. But then I read this, and don’t worry so much anymore:
Bear in mind this game is PC and PS4, so worth doubling your assumptions. Even then, I’d urge caution about making assumptions regarding what’s needed for the game to survive/thrive.
Thinking about the structure of the game, as its publisher, I would rather it grow at a steady rate over a long period of time in a sustainable way, then welcome in 100,000 new players in a week and subsequently struggle to scale.
Because the game is entirely player-generated, growth is a balance - the economy, the planet map, the portal networks, everything in the game suits a long-term view. There’s a worrying tendency these days for people to look at concurrent users of games which are entirely unrepresentative and assume because this game doesn’t yet match them, it’s a terrible thing.
As things stand there are a good number of active players each day (hint: not ‘concurrents’ which is active players at any one time) and the engagement rates are very promising. The universe and its economy are in the process of stabilising after a wipe and fresh start. The nature of the game is such that if there were a million active players tomorrow, it wouldn’t make the game experience better for anybody.
So I totally understand your perspective here btw - but too much too soon isn’t our priority. I guess, in other words, no cause for concern at this point!
4 Likes